The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1887-06-30
THE PERSONAL LIBERTY ISSUE IN
PROHIBITION.
From the Toledo Blade.

THE PEkSONAL LIBERTY ISSUE In
PROHIBITION.
From the Toledo Blade.
In every contest in which q great
moral question is involved, it seems to be
a favorite method of the party which has
the weaker side of the abstract question
itself, to confuse the minds of the masses
by placing the issue in false light. The
cutie fish, on being attacked, elects the
contents Of its ink.bag, thus becloudiDg
the waters and rendering escape possible.
The cry Of personal liberty" is as useful
to the supporters of the Rum traffic as is
the bag of ink to the cutie fish. It
serves 10 darken the real point of attack,
and confuse public opinion. We pro.
pose to discuss this matter of personal
liberty briefly.
1t is fact known to all men that
drunkards and drinking men are made
by convivial drinking, and especially by
the abominable habit of "treatiog"
which prevails so extensively. Two men
meet in a saloon, or perhaps several
come together; one invites the others to
drink at his expense. Then another of
the party, not wishing to appear churlisb,
proposes another drink at his expense |;
and so it goes round the circle until as
many drinks have been taken as there
are persons therein. 1t is plain that
such q course of training will very
speedily beget in the system of one sub
jected to it, the abominable Drink Thirst
that craving, guawing desire for alco.
holic stimulus which is incomprehensi-
BILE to any one not yet its victim yet
which is most awful reality to those
who are.
There is no human appetite so terrible
in its cravings as this. One of its slaves
told the writer few years since, "When
this internal craving comes upon me, if
glass of whisky were set before, and l
knew, to an absolute certainty, that |
would be stricken dead one minute after
had swallowed it, I would gulp it
down." The Drink Thirst is the only
earthly approximation to the tortures of
the damned in perdition. 1t is con.
sumiDg fire within the vitals, which can
only be extinguished for the time being
by alcohol and this in turn increases the
| internal thirst on the next occasion. 1t
is plain, too, that, as the very great
majority of our drunkards-and drunk.
ard is nothing but man in whom this
Rum thirst has been established d-are
caused by this convivial system of drink
ing, if the opportunity for treating were
removed-if there was not on every
square of every city of the land, on every
street of every village, places in which
this conviviality can be indulged-those
men who have not yet established this
fearful Rum thirst, this habit of drinking,
all of the rising generation who are as
yet too young to have commenced, would
be saved from all danger of ever becom.
ing drunkards.
The taste for liquor is not natural
one. There are some persons who are
under an Inherited curse, in whom the
taste for Rum is a horrible legacy left
them by an intemperate father or grand
father; but they are as yet only small
proportion of the entire community.
The taste of liquor, to an unaccustomed
palate, is generally unwelcome. A
young man, to become drinking man,
has first to overcome this repugnance.
In very many cases, probably nine out Of
ten, this would never happen if the
opportunity for carnival drinking were
taken away. How can this be done
Simply by closing the places devoted
thereto. Shut up every saloon, every
public drinking place, and nine .tenths OF
the next generation of drunkards would
be saved.
But when such subject is broached,
up comes the cry that there is an inya-
sion of "personal liberty" Now, 80 far
as the rights Of the Rumseller are con-
cerned, or the individual right Of each
separate drinker to indulge his taste as be
may choose, they are but small proper.
tion of the question at issue. 1t is not a
| question whether A has the right to sell
a glass of whiskey to B, or whether G
has right to buy from D schooner Of
beer and drink it; but il also embraces
the question whether the wife and chill
dren and other dependents Of B and @,
the drinkers, have any rights which A
or D or B or G are bound to respect.
The question is whether A has right
! to fill his till with the hard earnings Of
BIS daily labor in exchange for the vile
body.rot in which he deals, while BIS
wife and little ones are starving at home,
and after getting from him his last
nickel, and stealing from his brains as
we'll, turning him out, to stagger home
and beat and abuse them. 1t is not a
question whether John Smith, when
sober, is good citizen whose right to an
occasional glass is not to be interferred
with; but whether John Smith, having
weakness for an occasional glass and
bearing a grudge against his neighbor,
may go to the doggery, and after having
reused all the baser passions of his ua.
ture by indulgence-having gotten him.
self lighting drunk"-may happen to
remember his grudge. and, meeting his
neighbor, may murder him in his
drunken rage.
Again, it is question involved in this
issue of personal liberty" whether a
man is not public enemy who keeps
open, day and night, resort which